• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

More gub'ment waste: sea level rises affect DHS?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I don't see any problem with an agency planning for various scenarios.

What I don't understand is how, in an agency so immense and 8 years old, they haven't ALREADY created contingency plans for different situations. There's nothing that could be caused by "climate change" that isn't already a possibility. Floods, wildfires, hurricanes all have been happening for eons. What would they need to do differently just because floods, hurricanes, etc. could be triggered by climate change?

I can understand having to create plans for new threats. These aren't new.

And hasn't FEMA already done this type of research? Either FEMA is negligent for not having done this already, or DHS is wasteful for doing something that's already been done.
 
kranky said:
I don't see any problem with an agency planning for various scenarios.

What I don't understand is how, in an agency so immense and 8 years old, they haven't ALREADY created contingency plans for different situations. There's nothing that could be caused by "climate change" that isn't already a possibility. Floods, wildfires, hurricanes all have been happening for eons. What would they need to do differently just because floods, hurricanes, etc. could be triggered by climate change?

I can understand having to create plans for new threats. These aren't new.

And hasn't FEMA already done this type of research? Either FEMA is negligent for not having done this already, or DHS is wasteful for doing something that's already been done.
Click to expand...

Well, considering the research and new data on things like our infrastructure, these plans have to be refreshed on regular intervals. So, it isn't exactly a waste of resources to update those plans. Considering the level of climate-denial in the past, it wouldn't surprise me that said plans were not in place over the long term.
 
drebo said:
I am saying that there is no proof what so ever that our climate is any worse by any changes that may or may not be happening. I am also saying that if there were any changes, they would be happening over such a long period of time that our evolution to deal with those changes would be implicit and would not require a special "task force."

I am also taking issue with the fact that FEMA earned only a brief mention in the article and that the majority seems to be about other "organizations" within the DHS.
Click to expand...
Quick, someone tell Alaska to break up their Climate Change Strategy group.

There is no need to relocate several coastal villages because the reduction of sea ice is causing whole villages to erode into the sea. Wait, that program is already in place.

There is no need to reevaluate design guidelines for roads and bridges because of the changing severity of winters and the loss of permafrost. Oh, wait, that program is already in place.

There need not be concern for diseases spread by insects to people and wildlife because of the longer summer season. Oops, that program is already in place, too.

http://www.climatechange.alaska.gov/
 
What a joke. It is more likely the sea will rise as a result of Global Cooling because the mass of the Ice will increase. Right now Europe is in the throes of an incredibly bad snow storm. Hard to tell if this is caused by global waming or cooling. The climate is always changing so grow up.
 
piasabird said:
What a joke. It is more likely the sea will rise as a result of Global Cooling because the mass of the Ice will increase. Right now Europe is in the throes of an incredibly bad snow storm. Hard to tell if this is caused by global waming or cooling. The climate is always changing so grow up.
Click to expand...

Wait, what? Even if we did enter an ice age, sea levels would be expected to DROP, not rise. See the Bering Land Bridge for example. Current theories on global warming does take into account regional cooling as things like ocean currents and wind patterns change.
 
EagleKeeper said:
She wants an assessement to bolster FEMA powers which is a subset of DHS
Click to expand...
This is really the heart of the problem. FEMA should not be under DHS. DHS needs to be smashed back into its constituent bits. Too much power was consolidated under a single agency. Some of its powers need to be revoked while others make some sense (we can argue til death about which is which 🙂 ).
 
piasabird said:
What a joke. It is more likely the sea will rise as a result of Global Cooling because the mass of the Ice will increase. Right now Europe is in the throes of an incredibly bad snow storm. Hard to tell if this is caused by global waming or cooling. The climate is always changing so grow up.
Click to expand...

Let me guess. You're thinking that because water freezes it takes up more volume. The problem with that idea is that the water builds up in glaciers on land. Also, before the water turns to ice it contracts.
 
Throckmorton said:
Sea level rise is already happening. There's nothing hypothetical about it.
Click to expand...
It's been rising for over 20,000 years. There's nothing hypothetical about it.

Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
 
Doc Savage Fan said:
It's been rising for over 20,000 years. There's nothing hypothetical about it.

Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
Click to expand...

Did you look at that graph before you posted it? See how for the last 8000 years it's been virtually flat? The sea level rise within the last century has been at a much higher rate than that very very slight upward line. 20cm over 100 years.

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/NASA_Mission_Poised_To_Help_Us_Gauge_Our_Rising_Seas_999.html


Here's a USGS graph http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/poster/sealevel.html


seaLevelChart.gif
 
Last edited:
techs said:
Hmm. US farmers are planting much earlier. I guess they are just stupid.
Click to expand...

Do you know that for a fact, or are you guessing? Because I know for a fact farmers in the Northern Illinois region planted much later in 2010 than in previous years.
 
hal2kilo said:
Just ask the people of Norfolk, VA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/26/science/earth/26norfolk.html
Click to expand...

If you'd bothered to read your own article it says

"Like many other cities, Norfolk was built on filled-in marsh. Now that fill is settling and compacting. In addition, the city is in an area where significant natural sinking of land is occurring. The result is that Norfolk has experienced the highest relative increase in sea level on the East Coast — 14.5 inches since 1930, according to readings by the Sewells Point naval station here. "

The sea level is rising by only a small amount in that area, it's land use change, sediment load, groundwater withdrawal and subsidence that has caused them their problems.

Peer reviewed paper, but behind a paywall.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...f1911315d3f2025ff72450700fb92288&searchtype=a

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level_png
 
Doc Savage Fan said:
So you think extrapolating extremely limited data sets is good science? Seriously. Show me a detailed graph over the past 1000 years and we'll talk.
Click to expand...

"extrapolating extremely limited data sets"?? I have no idea what you're talking about. But I'm sure you know a lot more about "good science" than NASA and the USGS...
 
monovillage said:
If you'd bothered to read your own article it says

"Like many other cities, Norfolk was built on filled-in marsh. Now that fill is settling and compacting. In addition, the city is in an area where significant natural sinking of land is occurring. The result is that Norfolk has experienced the highest relative increase in sea level on the East Coast — 14.5 inches since 1930, according to readings by the Sewells Point naval station here. "

The sea level is rising by only a small amount in that area, it's land use change, sediment load, groundwater withdrawal and subsidence that has caused them their problems.

Peer reviewed paper, but behind a paywall.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...f1911315d3f2025ff72450700fb92288&searchtype=a

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level_png
Click to expand...

Yes, I did read the whole article. No where in the article does it say that rising sea levels were not a contributing factor.

You see all facts have to be considered. Not your cherry picked ones.
 
I've never said that sea levels aren't rising, but in the case that's cited in the article they are a comparatively minor factor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top